ANS to CIX Interconnection

bjp at bjp at
Tue Sep 29 21:46:24 UTC 1992

>       Note that the 94 new networks will potentially be generating
> traffic which does not comply with the NSFNET Acceptable Use Policy.
> The new network numbers will be announced by the ANSNET to the peer
> networks that are both ANS CO+RE and CIX members. Those regionals or
> midlevels who are using default routing to point their traffic to the
> NSFNET backbone may wish to explicitly prohibit traffic between their
> users and these new networks if their internal policies require it.
> This may be done by either internal means (eg.  informing users), or
> by filtering in routers operated by the midlevel network.  Regionals
> may contact Merit to discuss other options for blocking this traffic
> if required.

Is there a reason why complete information is in the ENSS rather than the CNSS?
My understanding of the agreement is that it is for the benefit of ANSnet
and the CIX, so why should the regionals have to adjust the way they are set
up?  I'm not just saying this to be contrary (Honest).  I am really
interested in knowing why this method was chosen.  As others have pointed
out it move the burden of enforcing policy restriction to individual
AS pairs. Comments?

I am also interested in hearing what people pointing default at NSFnet
plan to do?

Brad Passwaters                                 (301)(982-3214)
SURAnet Operations                              bjp at
<My name, my opinions.>

More information about the NANOG mailing list